Jim Murray has been a disappointment. I know this isn't a novel take, but I feel compelled to say it. He seems like a cool guy, but he is (understandably, to a point) too deferential to Felger. Felger dominates the discussion so much and it seems like Murray want to show his ability to not be a total homer. Which is fine, except the show benefits greatly when it there is some decent, persuasive dissent from the Felger and Mazz point of view. See everyone loving Marshall Hook. You would think the show would encourage some debate -- sports radio has been manufacturing disagreements for year. But on this show, on most days, everyone agrees on the primary points and there is occasional disagreement over trivial information (ie, Felger calls the disclosure of the testimony a win, Mazz says it is 'not a loss.).